Preview

Constitutional Protections in Criminal Investigations

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1401 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Constitutional Protections in Criminal Investigations
Running Head: CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS

Constitutional Protections in Criminal Investigations

What are constitutional rights and why are they so important to us? Our Constitutional rights are in place to protect us from wrongful conviction and improper police behavior. Originally these rights were made in reaction to the abusive conduct displayed by British authorities during Colonial times. Without the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, we would not be a democracy, but instead we would become a communist country. The Constitution is pretty much our basis of freedom, because boundaries are set and it gives the government guidelines to which ones they can interfere with without violating them. Most importantly, citizens should know and understand their rights.
Most Americans are familiar with the Fifth Amendment due to the popular phrase “I plead the fifth,” which is used as a defense in trials. But what should be familiar are the protections that we might take for granted such as the protection from double jeopardy. This means that a person cannot be tried more than once for the same offense (Salky, 2010). When reading the Fifth Amendment it could be agreed upon that this is where the right to remain silent and the Miranda Rights emerged from. The Fifth Amendment reads:
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
The Fifth Amendment also protects from self-incrimination which



References: Kessler, Jesse V. (2010). Fourth Amendment: Select Issues and Cases. Nova Science Publishers. Available from: eBook Collection. Retrieved January 19, 2013. Pearson Higher Education (2012). Interrogations and Confessions. [PowerPoint Slides]. Retrieved from: http://content-crj.kaplan.edu. Pearson Higher Education (2012). Identification Procedures and the Role of the Witness. [PowerPoint Slides]. Retrieved from: http://content-crj.kaplan.edu. Salky, Steven M. (2010). The Privilege of Silence: Fifth Amendment Protections Against Self Incrimination. (12thed.). American Bar Association.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Ring Vs Arizona Case Study

    • 1401 Words
    • 6 Pages

    "The right to trial by jury guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment would be senselessly diminished if it encompassed the fact-finding necessary to increase a defendant's sentence by two years, but not the fact-finding necessary to put him to death".…

    • 1401 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Miranda v. Arizona case is considered to be one of the most important and famous cases in modern law history that provided the foundation for some important legal provisions. It occurred in 1966 in Arizona, when a young man named Ernesto Miranda, a Mexican immigrant living in Phoenix, Arizona, was charged with robbery, kidnapping, and rape of a young woman several years prior the trial (Zalman, 2010). Before the suspect was interrogated, the police did not inform him of his constitutional right to remain silent which allowed the interrogators to get the confession. Given that this case provided the foundation for the right to remain silent, it became very famous and important. The present paper attempts to analyze the…

    • 140 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The second of the Supreme Court Cases to be discussed is Miranda V. Arizona. The importance of this case is that Miranda was interrogated without knowledge of his 5th amendment rights. In this specific case, the police arrested Miranda from his home in order to take him into investigation at the Phoenix police station. While Miranda was put on trial, he was not informed that he had a right to an attorney. From this the officers were able to retrieve a signed written statement from Miranda. Most importantly, this letter stated that Miranda had full knowledge of his legal rights. From the evidence found, Miranda was sentenced to prison for 20 to 30 years. From here the Supreme Court stated that, “...Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated in obtaining the confession…” (Miranda V Arizona).…

    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    In the Miranda vs Arizona case Miranda established that the police are required to inform arrested persons that they have the right to remain silent, that anything they say may be used against them, and that they have the right to an attorney. The case involved a claim by the plaintiff that the state of Arizona, by obtaining a confession from him without having informed him of his right to have a lawyer present, had violated his rights under the Fifth Amendment regarding self incrimination. Miranda was arrested for kidnap and rape and was interrogated for a long period of time. This interrogation resulted in a signed confession. At court Miranda lawyer argued that the confession was obtained from a person who does not understand their rights. The court agreed that a person should be informed of their rights and understand them before the police…

    • 1503 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.…

    • 402 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    "You have the right to remain silent." Those words have been popularized in television and movies, and many people recognize them as the opening of the Miranda rights. But what those rights are, and what results when police officers fail to read them to criminal suspects, are topics that are frequently misunderstood. Before Miranda, the right against self-incrimination was never self-executing and always had to be invoked by the suspect. This invocation is what is commonly referred to as ‘pleading the Fifth.' In Miranda, the Supreme Court shifted this burden to the police, and required them to specifically advise suspects of their right to remain silent and their right to have an attorney present during questioning. The Court ruled that all statements or confessions made in the absence of the warnings are inherently involuntary and coerced, and hence inadmissible in court.…

    • 562 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The role of the criminal investigation process is to balance the rights of the victims and offenders in society. All individuals’ wether victim, offender or member of society have basic rights to which the law attempts to adhere to. While all are individual, the rights will differ for the purpose of maintaining a balance in society. Though upholding the rights of the people is essential in order to ensure that the investigation process is conducted correctly and without abuse.…

    • 1011 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Davenport, A. U. (2006). Basic criminal law: The U.S. Constitution, procedure, and crimes. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc…

    • 1957 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Fifth Amendment states “no person … shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” When someone “pleads the fifth” they are protecting themselves against self-incrimination. The Miranda warning is supposed to advise you of this, that way if you incriminate yourself after, they can’t say they didn’t warn you. If someone is not advised of this, then something like the Patane case can occur. Patane was arrested for illegal possession of a handgun. The officer failed to deliver his Miranda rights and Patane tried to use this in court to get his gun returned to him and for the charges to be dismissed. It was determined that his statement was not in violation of the…

    • 667 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Malinowski, T. (2008). Restoring Moral Authority: Ending Torture, Secret Detention, and the Prison at Guantanamo Bay. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/40375781.pdf?acceptTC=true…

    • 956 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    What Is Moral Panics?

    • 1531 Words
    • 7 Pages

    However they were sentenced to prison with sentences ranging from 6 months to seven years. After this case, the 5th Amendment was incorporated to the states, stating that no one can torture people to confess a crime. This Amendment is also still relevant today because it is used when suspects are being interrogated, they can have the option against self-incrimination. The suspect has to verbally say “I remain silent” in order for it to be legal for the criminal not to talk to the police. The right to remain silent, came from the case Miranda V. Arizona in 1966.…

    • 1531 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    One of the great landmarks is man's struggle to be free of tyranny, to be decent and civilized.” Although this is a great amendment, what if there was a criminal at court and you knew he was guilty but he plead the fifth? What would you do? Well you wouldn't be able to…

    • 586 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Miranda Rights are an essential part of the United States judicial system. Without the right against self-incrimination, the prosecution would no longer bear the burden of proof in criminal court. They could simply ask: "Did you do it?" However, the article this week details the intense pressure of the interrogation room, regardless of whether physical tactics are used or not. It almost sounded like some confessions were coerced, though they clearly met the legal definition of a confession. Is it truly the right to remain silent after being interviewed for days at a time? While I am a strong supporter of the right against self-incrimination, the closing paragraph of the article summed it up nicely: "the privilege is fulfilled only when…

    • 143 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The fifth amendment states that, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”. Would the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination prohibit the government from any of the following: requiring all participants in a lineup to speak certain words; requiring a person to produce income tax records; threatening a person with a reduction in pay in his government job if he does not make incriminating testimonial admissions about a matter not related to his job? A details analysis of the Fifth Amendment and self-incrimination will help us to determine the answer to this question.…

    • 842 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    These cases are Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972). The decisions in Brady and Giglio are further expanded in other decisions including United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976), United States v. Bagley, 473 U. S. 667 (1985), Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U. S. 419 (1995), and most recently in Kitsap County Deputy Sheriff’s Guild v. Kitsap County, 165 P. 3d 1266 (2007). The Supreme Court decision of Brady v. Maryland in 1963 resulted in a landmark decision that significantly affected the criminal justice system (Rothlein, 2007). Brady, the petitioner in Brady v. Maryland, was a co-defendant in a murder trial where the state did not divulge to the defense a statement made by the other co-defendant. The statement in question was an admission by the other co-defendant admitting to the actual killing that the prosecuting attorney withheld from the court.…

    • 1933 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays